Causality – and the cosmological view

Hello Rabbi,
The cosmological argument is based on the principle of causality. A principle that assumes that every event and phenomenon has a reason behind it that explains its occurrence (or at least has sufficient reason). From this, the cosmological argument attempts to derive the existence of a cause for the world because the world has a cause.
But there is a very significant leap from the assumption of causality to its application to the world. Because the principle of causality speaks of events that we know have occurred. But regarding entities we do not know whether they have a cause or not. So how can we learn from our short-term observation of the world that all the factors in the world were created!? For example, if we assume that energy as a whole was created, then there is a law of conservation of energy-mass, so we can never expect that energy was created or annihilated.
The rabbi addresses this in his notebook and writes a claim that sounds very strange to me.
“In essence, we assume that the objects around us are not the necessity of reality, nor are they their own cause (see the notebook on the ontological view), and therefore they necessarily had to be created. Therefore, there must be a reason for their creation, that is, a reason for their existence. Therefore, whoever accepts the principle of causality must also accept the corresponding principle regarding the existence of objects or beings.”
So I wanted to ask what this desired assumption is?!? After all, it is not drawn from observation, as I have already shown from the law of conservation of energy-mass. And on the other hand, it is not drawn from pure reason either – after all, there we accept that only occurrences have a cause, but we have no reason to assume that the singular point/energy has a cause. Therefore, all that remains is to say that it is drawn from naive faith. But I am not sure that this is what the Rabbi meant.